Hi res again?

[Phelonious Ponk]

Tim ,

As you are a jazz lover, I would love to hear about your opinion about these Shostakovitch Quartets.

There is an interesting spoken introduction to the music of these quartets (even slightly referring to concepts that some audiophiles praise a lot such as "Public being there" , "Atmosphere of the hall" and "silence" by cellist David Finckel of the Emerson Quartet at

http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=6160527&m=91808934

Micro, I don't know if they're the same recordings, but I found The Borodin String Quartet playing Shastakovich numbers 7 & 8. There's nothing about them that reminds me of jazz, or at least not the jazz I listen to (BeBop, Hard Bop, Cool), but they are beautiful. Dark. Sad. Abstract. I like 'em. Thanks.

Tim

 

[fas42]

Thanks for the input, but I think I'll go with the experts and their specific statements. My assertion that, "the benefits of bitrate are limited to dynamic range and low noise floor," are a distillation of their more comprehensive output.

If you limit the argument to bit rate only that is correct, but the dynamic range and noise floor of 16 bit are perfectly adequate IF the material has been mastered properly. And that is a very big IF! If you base your assessment on actual typical recordings, rather on material that's been processed correctly then one is likely to get the wrong idea. A test CD of identical classical material at 0dB, -20, -40, -60db demonstrates what the medium is capable of ...

Frank

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

If you limit the argument to bit rate only that is correct, but the dynamic range and noise floor of 16 bit are perfectly adequate IF the material has been mastered properly. And that is a very big IF! If you base your assessment on actual typical recordings, rather on material that's been processed correctly then one is likely to get the wrong idea. A test CD of identical classical material at 0dB, -20, -40, -60db demonstrates what the medium is capable of ...

Frank

Not sure I get your drift here, Frank. The better-mastered recording, with broader dynamic range, will push the limits of any format. A poorly-mastered recording, with less dynamic range, will be easier for any format (though it may simply sound bad on its own). But it sounds like you're saying that the poor master could be the more difficult dynamic challenge for Redbook. The opposite would be true. What am I missing?

Tim

 

[fas42]

Not sure I get your drift here, Frank. The better-mastered recording, with broader dynamic range, will push the limits of any format. A poorly-mastered recording, with less dynamic range, will be easier for any format (though it may simply sound bad on its own). But it sounds like you're saying that the poor master could be the more difficult dynamic challenge for Redbook. The opposite would be true. What am I missing?

Tim

Sorry if I added confusion: just looking at what I said I can see that it doesn't quite put the point as well as I should have. I was trying to assert that a poorly mastered recording could lead one to think the format had poor dynamic range in of itself, rather than it beautifully capturing exactly what had been done at the mastering stage. Formats that have less of an intrinsic range will tend to hide a poor job done in the studio, because the higher noise floor of the medium will nicely soften the rough edges in the material being fed to the recording device. I'm thinking here of less than top notch R2R , effectively a form of analogue dithering is occurring, with the steady, anonymous tape hiss creating a soothing backdrop to the sound.

So my argument is that the 16 bits will do full justice to the material if the studio engineer is scrupulous in handling levels, and maintaining dynamic range everywhere. Of course, having 24 bits to play with at the editing phase will make his job a lot easier, so long as it always stays in digital ...

Frank

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Sorry if I added confusion: just looking at what I said I can see that it doesn't quite put the point as well as I should have. I was trying to assert that a poorly mastered recording could lead one to think the format had poor dynamic range in of itself, rather than it beautifully capturing exactly what had been done at the mastering stage. Formats that have less of an intrinsic range will tend to hide a poor job done in the studio, because the higher noise floor of the medium will nicely soften the rough edges in the material being fed to the recording device. I'm thinking here of less than top notch R2R , effectively a form of analogue dithering is occurring, with the steady, anonymous tape hiss creating a soothing backdrop to the sound.

So my argument is that the 16 bits will do full justice to the material if the studio engineer is scrupulous in handling levels, and maintaining dynamic range everywhere. Of course, having 24 bits to play with at the editing phase will make his job a lot easier, so long as it always stays in digital ...

Frank

I guess that depends on what you care to listen to. If you start out with tape hiss, then add more noise floor with your digital mastering, does that "soften and smooth" or just make for more noise? Just more noise, I think, but to be honest, I usually only hear these problems in very old recordings or very bad ones (a category into which I would put many pop records for many decades). I was listening to the Shastakovich Quartets recommended by Micro last night. I'm guessing these recordings were made in the 60s by the cover art, and I was listening to them on Spotify, so internet streaming at a maximum of 320kbps. I was listening on Sennheiser HD580s in a very quiet room through a very quiet headphone system. There was GOBS of dynamic range. You should listen to the piece if you have a way to get to it. Very modern for string quartet stuff, with passages that jump from a violin whispering alone, just above the noise floor, to the full quartet blasting as hard as those instruments will blast. Honestly, it was more dynamic range than I thought was possible from a string quartet; it jumped like a percussion transient.

I couldn't hear the noise floor between the strokes of that lone, whispering violin unless I concentrated on it. If we get that out of a digital master of a good recording from the 60s, streamed over the internet at 320kbps or less, into reference headphones, our noise floor problem is not something to be purged from well-designed, properly functioning amplifiers, it's in our recordings.

Tim

 

[microstrip]

Micro, I don't know if they're the same recordings, but I found The Borodin String Quartet playing Shastakovich numbers 7 & 8. There's nothing about them that reminds me of jazz, or at least not the jazz I listen to (BeBop, Hard Bop, Cool), but they are beautiful. Dark. Sad. Abstract. I like 'em. Thanks.

Tim

Happy you like them. Surely they will not remind you of jazz - I was just playing with another Shostakovitch work - The Jazz Album. In the 1930's russian jazz was just light popular music and The Jazz Album has more Viennese influence than real jazz - it includes some nice waltzes, polkas, dances and even a foxtrot ...

The Borodin are my favorites and this was the recording I was referring in the attachment. These quartets are dark and sad, but Shostakovitch 14th Symphony, which main and only theme is death, is even darker. Although I really like it, it is not the kind of music I can listen everyday. My favorite version is also from Decca - the Concertegebouw Orchestra conducted by Bernard Haitink.

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

Happy you like them. Surely they will not remind you of jazz - I was just playing with another Shostakovitch work - The Jazz Album. In the 1930's russian jazz was just light popular music and The Jazz Album has more Viennese influence than real jazz - it includes some nice waltzes, polkas, dances and even a foxtrot ...

The Borodin are my favorites and this was the recording I was referring in the attachment. These quartets are dark and sad, but Shostakovitch 14th Symphony, which main and only theme is death, is even darker. Although I really like it, it is not the kind of music I can listen everyday. My favorite version is also from Decca - the Concertegebouw Orchestra conducted by Bernard Haitink.

I really appreciate you pointing me toward them. I've been listening to them more today. it is dark, intense, but deeply beautiful stuff. Do you know when it was recorded? The recording is very good. That's obvious even from an internet stream.

Tim

 

[microstrip]

The quartets were recorded by Melodiya in the USSR in 1981 and 1978 and digitally remastered by EMI in 1985 for CD.

Many recordings of chamber music of the 60s and 70s coming from the USSR have a very interesting sound - sometimes noisy and with some distortion, but sounding very natural and airy.

 

[RBFC]

Tim,

This set has extremely good reviews. It's on my list, and I have a rather extensive Shostakovich collection:

http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Stri...=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1313884600&sr=1-1

Also available on SACD if you're interested.

Lee

 

[fas42]

There was GOBS of dynamic range. You should listen to the piece if you have a way to get to it. Very modern for string quartet stuff, with passages that jump from a violin whispering alone, just above the noise floor, to the full quartet blasting as hard as those instruments will blast. Honestly, it was more dynamic range than I thought was possible from a string quartet; it jumped like a percussion transient.

I couldn't hear the noise floor between the strokes of that lone, whispering violin unless I concentrated on it. If we get that out of a digital master of a good recording from the 60s, streamed over the internet at 320kbps or less, into reference headphones, our noise floor problem is not something to be purged from well-designed, properly functioning amplifiers, it's in our recordings.

Tim

I agree entirely with your points, I have a repertoire of string quartet recording material on CD for assessing sound quality, and the ability of a system to able to reproduce the rosin, intensity and sweet soulfullness of that solo violin, and then the almost sheer ferocity of all four instruments going for it is an key indicator for me.

Just talking of tape hiss for a moment, that about 75dB down on the best machines, CD is 96dB dynamic range, that's over 20dB margin to play with in the studio: if you can hear digital dithering over the tape hiss then to me that spells incompetence in the engineering.

On a lighter note, I love finding something obscure gems: an absolutely nothing label, Ivan Czerkow, violin with Pantelli, conductor, Tchaikovsky Concerto, beautiful, beautiful playing with a tone to die for ...

Frank

 

[Lee]

I just have issues with people who have issues with 16/44.1 ...!!

Frank

Well I try to bring an informed opinion about differing sampling rates.

 

[Vincent Kars]

I'm currently listening to Beethoven's String Quartet No. 16 in F.
Tim

Heavy stuff
Try Opus 59.1/2/3, pretty wild